ReviewCureus2023
Digitization in Skin Shade Matching for Maxillofacial Prostheses: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Color matching of maxillofacial prostheses for the restoration of maxillofacial defects is an important factor for esthetic results. Various methods have been introduced for the accurate and reliable color matching of prostheses with the skin color of patients. A systematic review was conducted to search the existing literature on color-matching digital techniques for maxillofacial prostheses. An electronic literature search was conducted in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science from January 2000 to December 2022 using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Two independent reviewers conducted the search. Eight articles that fulfilled the inclusion criteria after a full-text evaluation were included in this review. Most of these studies were published in prosthodontics journals and conducted in various countries around the world. A computerized color formulation system was used in three studies; a non-contact spectroradiometer (PR 705; Photo Research Inc., Chatsworth, CA) with a Xenon arc lamp was used in two studies; a mobile phone colorimeter was used in one study; additive manufacturing of 3D facial skin with a spectrophotometer was used in one study; and a recently introduced computerized method known as e-skin (Spectromatch, Bath, UK) was used in two studies. Most of these methods were accurate in color matching, except for the additive manufacturing system, which showed less accuracy, but good repeatability. Owing to a lack of sufficient studies, no method can be labeled as the best method for color-matching maxillofacial prostheses. The latest computerized method, the e-skin, can be used to achieve better accuracy and good color matching. However, further studies are required to validate the use of e-skin for precise color matching.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.